How radical was the classic Civil Rights Movement?

By Harriet Coombs, Second Year History Student

A term coined by historian Bayard Rustin, the classic Civil Rights Movement most commonly refers to the organised efforts against Black disenfranchisement that began with the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) and culminated with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  ‘Radical’ by definition refers to affecting the fundamental nature of something, and advocating based on complete political or social change. The classic Civil Rights Movement, arguably characterised by the ‘infallible’ Martin Luther King Jr, has typically been presented as one of the most remarkable mass movements in American history; its goals of true integration by definition both extensive and radical. Despite this, there are serious limitations to routinely defining the classic Civil Rights Movement as radical.  The advent of Black Power and the subsequent apparent demise of the Civil Rights Movement can be seen as an explicit vindication for the lack of tolerance in the classic movement for radical thought.  Regardless of these criticisms, the fact remains that whilst King’s Civil Rights Movement adhered to non-violence and encouraged interracial cooperation, its message and impact was undeniably radical.  This essay, whilst dissecting the ‘mass media event’ of the classic Civil Rights Movement, will refute the claim King was a moderate, present Black Power as both a part and a natural progression of the classic Civil Rights movement and ultimately reach the conclusion that though the Civil Rights Movement undoubtedly became more radical, the long Civil Rights Movement was rooted in radical thought.  Additionally, it will criticise the master narrative that has rendered the cultural memory of the classic Civil Rights Movement unambiguously non-violent in method and thought; in turn, stressing the extent to which the omitted local and international contexts of the period only make it more radical.

            The ‘temporal sequence’ of the Civil Rights Movement, as Tom Holt put it, beginning in the mid-1950s and declining with the death of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968 has an enduring cultural legacy, depicted as a separate entity to the struggles against Black marginalisation that preceded and followed it. The product of mass media made protests, this period is differentiated from what came before, the coverage seeming to have no historical roots. As historian Charles Payne argues, such a categorisation of the Civil Rights Movement underplays the gravity of earlier periods of struggle. Yet this differentiation of the classic Civil Rights Movement in the popular cultural memory at once supports and negates the statement that the movement was radical.  In separating the classic Civil Rights Movement from its longer context, the ‘Montgomery to Memphis’ framework seems to have been born out of post-war frustrations.  In isolation from its origins then, the classic Civil Rights Movement is perceived as a radical social and political change.  Yet conversely, as Jacquelyn Dowd Hall illustrates, in eliminating elements of the Civil Rights Movement from the classic narrative; say omitting King as a harsh critic of capitalism, the story is diluted, the movement more moderate.

The reality of the classic movement was that ‘radical’ ideas, rooted in years of African American strife, had come to a national stage.  John Dittmer and Charles Payne both stress that the movement centred in the deep South was an outcome of decades of black activism that predated the modern era. Even the Meredith March, which in its latter stages became an explicit expression of Black Power, can be attributed in part to an ongoing debate about the necessity of armed defence in the south. This broader chronology does not serve to downplay how radical the classic movement was, but rather to give significance to its roots.  Similarly, the representation of a leader such as King as a moderate fails to accurately depict how radical the classical Civil Rights Movement was becoming.  Forgotten, Kathleen McElroy emphasises in her study of reporter written obituaries of black civil rights leaders, is the King who stressed integration meant nothing without economic freedom also. The master narrative glosses over King’s militant stances on economic equality, the ‘dream’ taking precedence over his radical critiques of poverty. The manner in which media coverage changed with the advent of Black Power, Dowd Hall also argues, supports the declension narrative of the Civil Rights Movement, further suggesting that the increasingly radical ideas of Stokely Carmichael and Malcolm X were not a part of the Civil Rights Movement. The master narrative of the Civil Rights Movement both fails to give credit to both the legacies of black resistance and the increasing popularity of Black Power. In doing so, the narrative omits as much as it exposes. The cultural memory of the movement which fails to include the long Civil Rights Movement overlooks how radical it truly was in favour of a more nostalgic narrative.

            The classic Civil Rights Movement’s meta-narrative is undeniably centred around Martin Luther King Jr., who’s characterisation as a Christian preacher of non-violence undermines his radical stance.  As historian Ashley Woodson argues, King has been presented as a salient individual, the principal figure in a master narrative of ‘martyrs and messiahs’. The legacy of King’s ‘I have a dream speech’ is but one example of the predominately conservative interpretation of his preaching, his call for all children to live as ‘sisters and brothers’ prevailing over his critiques of the limited economic mobility of African Americans. Traditional scholarship which has focused on the opposing ‘sides’ of the classic Civil Rights Movement, has only further helped elevate Martin Luther King Jr. to a seemingly untouchable position. An article in The Commercial Appeal stressing that the emergence of Black Power in 1966 marked a noteworthy shift in tactics for African-Americans who had been ‘lulled’ by the rhetoric of Martin Luther King therefore might be seen as typical in its suggestion that King’s tactics and ideas differed dramatically from his more radical counterparts. The reality was different: following the Meredith March, King supported the SNCC’s provocative manifesto criticising the government of Lyndon B. Johnson. Additionally, on Black Power, King commented that ‘No one can deny that the Negro is in dire need of this kind of legitimate power’. Though Wendt notes how King carefully stressed that Black Power was a manifestation of black frustration and disappointment, he at the same time was validating Stokely Carmichael’s strategy, whose replacement of the deeply religious John Lewis as head of the SNCC itself represented as Wendt goes on to argue the ongoing radicalisation of the organisation.

King’s support for the most radical branch of the classic Civil Rights Movement can be easily overstated.  He consistently remained distanced from the SNCC and Malcolm X, his absence notable from Carmichael’s ‘Black Power’ speech in the summer of 1966.  True too is the fact that King became more radical through the classic movement.  King’s increasing radicalism after the Selma campaign in 1965 was apparent in his progressively vocal criticisms of American capitalism and the Vietnam War.  Not unlike W. E. B Du Bois, both King’s strategy and thought became more radical later in his career, though juxtaposed against more vocal cries for ‘Black Power’ by younger radicals, this image is defused. Although this moderate character might have prevailed in popular culture, the fact that the FBI was concerned with King’s radicalism supports the argument that whilst King’s method was non-violent, his position at the centre of the classic Civil Rights Movement remained and became increasingly radical.

            The advent of radical Black Power highlighted a split in the Black freedom struggle that existed between the more moderate NAACP and SNCC.  The emphasis of this fragmentation in the movement gave credit to the declension narrative, something that falsely emphasised the moderance of the NAACP.  The symbolism of moderation’ in the Civil Rights Movement is far from a unique concept.  Derrick Alridge argues that, like in the case of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, scholars have perpetuated the master narrative of moderation versus radicalism through portrayals of Du Bois versus Marcus Garvey. At the centre of this debate undoubtedly lies the issue of non-violence as a principle.  This debatably became the single most distinguishing factor between the SNCC and the NAACP in the latter half of the 1960’s.  Ella Baker’s open criticism of King’s ‘’leader-centred’ style, particularly pertinent given her former role as Associate Director of his SCLC can be seen as evidence for the presence of a growing split in the movement. It was true that there were increasingly significant differences between the more conservative NAACP and SNCC.  When Roy Wilkins, assistant NAACP secretary denounced Black Power, the outgrowth of the SNCC as ‘a reverse Hitler, a reverse Ku Klux Klan’ he was both distancing the organisation from and in turn making a stance against this new black militancy.

These were internal differences in the classic Civil Rights Movement, but evident in the near bankruptcy of the SNCC at the end of Summer in 1966 was the projection of two radically different, opposing branches of the civil rights movement to white America also. These fundamental differences in method are stressed by Barbara Ransby who has stated that grassroots activism and group centred leadership like Ella Baker’s in the SNCC set them apart. Neither Ransby or Dowd Hall overstate the significance of the growing separation between the NAACP and SNCC, however such a dissection in methods arguably overlooks what is at the centre of this debate.  Dowd Hall herself argues that creating an ‘equitable, democratic, multi-racial society’ was a radical goal. Despite adhering to a policy of non-violence, the NAACP’s demands were still radical:  Philip Randolph had partnered with NAACP leaders just a decade earlier to call for an all-black delegation, a parallel to the call for ‘closed ranks’ that were central to the Black Power philosophy. Though traditional historiography has presented the NAACP and SNCC as opposing parties it remains clear that both perpetuated a radical message.

            Though often excluded from the classic narrative, or at best portrayed in very different terms, Black Power, the most radical facet of the period can be seen as growing out of the same frustrations as the Civil Rights Movement.  This idea is supported by Timothy Tyson who illustrates that both Black Power and the Civil Rights Movement confronted the same dilemmas and were grounded in the same pursuit of African American liberation. The master narrative’s inclusion of Black Power is effectively limited to Malcolm X, the Black Panther Party and the effect of his angry and uncompromising rhetoric. The aims of Black Power did not differ greatly from that of the Civil Rights Movement, though there was a definite emphasis placed on self-reliance, racial solidarity and economic individuality. The slogan ‘Black Power’ was seen as replacing ‘Freedom Now’, the trademark of the classic Civil Rights Movement.  This in itself reveals much about the master narrative.  The demise of the movement following King’s death serves to vindicate the idea that Black Power had no place, or popularity within the classic movement.  Todd Gitlin supports this idea, stating that Black Power created a chasm between African Americans and their white allies. Comparatively, Clayborne Carson’s ‘In Struggle’ commented that Black Power reflected dormant traditions of ‘black radicalism’. Indeed, the radical Black Panther Party was but one, poorly defined component of the political spectrum of Black Power.  Few would seek to deny that Black Power did not represent a radical, dramatically different way of thinking than before.  Rather, by excluding it altogether from the master narrative the classic Civil Rights Movement can be contained within the ‘Montgomery to Memphis’ framework. By presenting Black Power as Carson put it, a ‘logical outgrowth’ of the Civil Rights Movement, its inclusion in the classic narrative clearly indicates the increasing extent to which radical ideas were coming to the forefront in the Civil Rights Movement.

            The broader context within which Black Power emerged is necessary to consider in order to understand how radical the classic Civil Rights Movement was.  Dan Berger argues that the Civil Rights Era cannot be separated from its international context, emphasising that the spirit of revolt that emerged from the colonised world. Renee Romano too argues that the Cold War facilitated the classic Civil Rights Movement; protests as a fight for legal equality through the Constitution. Equally argued however, is the way in which such anti-communist feeling led to the narrowing of protest.  Martin Luther King, despite making a comment to distance himself from communists, was labelled by the FBI as such. The fact then, that the classic Civil Rights Movement not only occurred but endured in this restricted political climate only serves to further radicalise the classic Civil Rights Movement.  The domestic context of the classic Civil Rights Movement is also worth considering, particularly with regard to gender.  Women were undeniably important in directing the Civil Rights Movement, Ella Baker just one example of a prominent female leader.  Despite the fact that women did not feel confined by their gender, their sexuality was not politicised or as problematic to them as race and poverty. This notion arguably reduces the extent to which the classic Civil Rights Movement was radical.

            The master narrative of the classic Civil Rights Movement is a moderate one, characterised by the infallible Martin Luther King Jr., enduring in popular culture as a bookended period of triumph over struggle.  Radical components of organisations like the NAACP have been omitted from the classic narrative which fails to consider the long Civil Rights Movement. Black Power, categorised as the opposition to the Civil Rights Movement implies that there was no room for radical ideas, supporting the declension narrative.  By placing the classic Civil Rights Movement in its broader context, it becomes clear that it was rooted in radical thought: both with regard to wrongly perceived moderates like King, and in its fundamental message.  The simple demand for true integration was arguably radical.  With the advent of Black Power and the SNCC’s shedding of non-violence as a principle, the movement clearly becomes more radical. Despite this, both the classic Civil Rights and Black Power movement it included can be seen as radically confronting the same issues, reflecting the same radical principles and provoking radical changes.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

National Archives, M. L. King, Jr. ‘I Have a Dream…’ https://templatelab.com/dream-speech/ [accessed 28th April 2019].

Secondary Sources

D. P. Alridge, ‘The Limits of Master Narratives in History Textbooks: An Analysis of Representations of Martin Luther King, Jr.’ Teachers College Record, No.108.

D. Berger, Captive Nation: Black Prison Organizing in the Civil Rights Era, (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press: 2014)

C. Carson, In Struggle: SNCC and the Black Awakening of the 1960’s (United States of America: Harvard University Press, 1981)

B. Collier-Thomas, Sisters in the Struggle: African American Women in the Civil Rights-Black Power Movement (New York: NYU Press, 2001)

C. M. Condit and J. L. Lucaites ‘Malcolm X and the Limits of the Rhetoric of Revolutionary Dissent’ Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 23, No.3 (1993)

M Ellis, ‘”Closing Ranks” and “Seeking Honors”: W. E. B. Du Bois in World War I’ The Journal of American History, Vol. 79, No. 1 (1992)

J Frost, ‘Using “Master Narratives” to Teach History: The Case of the Civil Rights Movement’, The History Teacher, Vol. 45, No. 3 (2012)

K. Gaines, ‘African-American History’ in E. Foner and L. McGirr, (ed.), American History Now (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2011)

J. Dowd Hall, ‘The Long Civil Rights Movement and the Political Uses of the Past’, The Journal of American History, Vol. 91, No. 4 (2005)

K. McElroy, ‘You Must Remember This: Obituaries and the Civil Rights Movement’, Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 44, No. 4 (2013)

J. O. G. Ogbar, Black Power: Radical Politics and African American Identity (Reconfiguring American Political History) (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004)

B. Ransby, Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision (United States of America: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003)

J. Rhodes, Framing the Black Panthers: The Spectacular Rise of a Black Power Icon (United States of America: University of Illinois Press, 2007)

R. Romano, ‘Moving Beyond “The Movement that Changed the World”: Bringing the History of the Cold War into Civil Rights Museums’ The Public Historian, Vol.31, No. 2 (2009)

B. Rustin ‘From Protest to Politics: The Future of the Civil Rights Movement’, Forward, No. 1 (1965)

T. Shelby ‘Two Conceptions of Black Nationalism: Martin Delany on the Meaning of Black Political Solidarity’ Political Theory, Vol. 31, No.5 (2003)

J. Todd Moye, Ella Baker (London: Rowman and Littlefield, 2013)

T. B. Tyson, ‘Robert F. Williams “Black Power” and the Roots of the African American Freedom Struggle’ The Journal of African American Freedom Struggle, Vol.85, No.2 (1998)

S. Wendt, ‘Black Power and White Fear’ in (ed.), The Spirit of the Shotgun: Armed Resistance and the Struggle for Civil Rights (Florida: University Press of Florida, 2007)

A. N. Woodson, ‘”There Ain’t No White People Here”: Master Narratives of the Civil Rights Movement in the Stories of Urban Youth’ Urban Education, Vol. 52, No. 3 (2017)

Other Sources

C. J. Hamilton Jr., The Harvard Crimson, ‘SNCC’ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1967/5/4/sncc-pat-a-student-non-violent-coordinating/ [Accessed 30 April 2019].

K. Phillips ‘In the latest JFK files: The FBI’s ugly analysis on Martin Luther King Jr., filled with falsehoods’ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/11/04/in-the-latest-jfk-files-the-fbis-ugly-analysis-on-martin-luther-king-jr-filled-with-falsehoods/?utm_term=.320d83e400b6 [Accessed 30 April 2019].

Oxford English Dictionary, ‘radical’, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/241857?rskey=h2l3Zh&result=2&isAdvanced=false#eid [accessed 27 April 2019].

Cover Photo Credit: Unseen Histories on Unsplash